'GETTING SADDAM TO COMPLY PEACEFULLY WITH THE OBLIGATIONS UPON HIM'

INTERVIEW BY JACK STRAW
UK FOREIGN SECRETARY

UK FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE

January 23, 2003

QUESTION:

Now a reminder of our main news tonight is the split in world opinion over Iraq. We've now got a position where if you take the five Permanent Members of the Security Council there's you and America on one side and Russia, China and France on the other.  Do you take the view President Bush took of a slightly different war that you're either with us or you're against it?

MR STRAW:

Well I don't think it's quite like that and one of the things that Secretary Powell and I were saying this morning at our joint Press conference was this, that all fifteen members of the Security Council signed up unanimously to the terms of resolution 1441 which was passed on the 8 November last year.  And that set out a series of very important propositions. 

It first of all said that we all found that Iraq was already in very serious material breach of a whole series of obligations because of its failure to disarm of its weapons of mass destruction.  We then went on from there to say that Iraq had to disarm for the future, put in inspectors and said if it failed to do so this was what a further material breach would be.  And then said right at the end of the resolution, and we all signed up to this, that if Iraq was in further material breach then serious consequences would follow and serious consequences can only mean one thing which is the use of force.

So we signed up to that in the United Nations, Germany who was not a member last year signed up to that, however in terms at the NATO summit which was held in Prague. 

QUESTION:

As of today France and Germany are saying they're opposed to war.  President Chirac wants the inspectors given more time and Russia and China are saying they're opposed to war as well.  You're not going to pretend are you that there's no difference between you and them?

MR STRAW:

Well there is a difference of emphasis and a difference of degree. I'm sorry to say that this is not just a matter of history, this is a matter of here and now for the future because words mean what they say and everybody around the table in New York on the 8 November knew that when they were signing up to that resolution they were signing up to give Saddam a last chance, putting the onus of proof on him and then saying that serious consequences would follow. 

What we're now involved in is a diplomatic process backed by a credible use of force to try even at this last moment to get Saddam Hussein to comply peacefully with the obligations upon him.

But I also know this - I know that our colleagues in the United Nations accept this, if sometimes reluctantly, that we are only at this point of having the authority of the United Nations properly enforced in respect of Iraq after twelve years of vacillation and humiliation as a result of backing active diplomacy with a credible use of force.

QUESTION:

Donald Rumsfeld has described France and Germany as old Europe, that's not terribly helpful to your position is it when you're trying to broker diplomat solutions?

MR STRAW:

Well, you know, I'm responsible for giving my answers to questions and others are responsible for giving their answers to questions. Now there are obvious differences of emphasis and people can read those in the newspapers, but is there disagreement about the fundamentals in respect of Iraq, no there is not there is complete agreement.

QUESTION:

Are you saying you would go to war?

MR STRAW:

There is a huge difference between the conditional and saying we will do it and what we have said is that we reserve the right obviously to make use of the use of force and that's always been clear and that is why we and the United States are now positioning troops in the region if force becomes necessary.  But no decisions have been taken in respect of military action. 

And I also make this point, which is a point I make particularly to my French and German colleagues, that the greatest possibility of resolving this matter peacefully is by the international community staying together and also making clear to Saddam Hussein that if he does not start to comply positively and completely with the obligations upon him, then there will be force used. Now if he continues to get that message I believe there can still be compliance.  And let us just remember this, that this is not a game of hide and seek for these inspectors.  The inspectors have already told Saddam that one of the things he's got to do is to account for the thousands of tonnes of poisons, of viruses, disease producing viruses, and also information about his development of his nuclear programme which the inspectors said was in Iraq but unaccounted for when they were effectively kicked out at the end of 1998.

QUESTION:

Will you give them more time (indistinct) to find it, because the inspectors themselves are pleading for more time.  President Chirac of France has said he believes they should be given more time.  Are you prepared to give them a little bit more time?

MR STRAW:

Well what of course we will do is to consider with very great care the report of the inspectors which comes before the Security Council on Monday next, the 27th, and I don't know, I've got no idea what is going to be in that.  I've not been aware of the inspectors quotes pleading for more time in the terms in which you put it.  But I just make this point - you're suggesting that this is some kind of hide and seek that the inspectors have to keep looking.

Of course we will consider with very great care what the inspectors say and then make our judgements, but meanwhile let me say this, the inspectors' job would be over by now if Iraq was fully complying and I think we'll find that that is a point reflected by some of what the inspectors will say and, you know, we already know that they've broken their word on their disclosure, they didn't tell us about the engine, missile engines that were found.  They didn't tell us about the shells that were found, they have not offered us an explanation as to why three thousand documents about the nuclear programme were found and are not found in a filing cabinet in an office, are found in somebody's private house.  These are huge questions which go to the heart of why up to now we all believe that Saddam Hussein has been profoundly deceitful and has little interest in complying fully with the obligations imposed on him.

QUESTION:

The Jordanian Foreign Minister told Channel Four News today that there is now only a one per cent chance of avoiding war.  Now you put odds on the chances on war a few days ago.  What do you say to one per cent chance of avoiding war?

MR STRAW:

Well what I've said all the way through this consistently is that the odds or the chance of avoiding war rests entirely with Saddam Hussein.  It is a matter for him.  There has always been a pathway to the peaceful resolution of this crisis by him complying with obligations which every other country in the world is expected to comply with and which he's had twelve years to come in to compliance so the, the, the opportunity and responsibility is his and what we want to see, we want to see this resolved peacefully.  We have no interest whatsoever in having to be forced to take military action.  But it does have to be resolved, yes to deal with Iraq, but also to ensure that the authority of the international order is maintained.